coming from the nhs at that moment. but how much of the debate on that monday revolves around an understanding of what the impact on the nhs might be? the reason i ask so that you can understand the genesis of the question, prime minister, is that there was a great deal of information about beds and icu beds and so on and how many would be needed and whether they would be needed and whether they would be needed and whether they would be overwhelmed and so on. but there was also a fair amount of information from the nhs as to what could be done by way of additional search capacity, whether the nhs would survive, whether it could survive, and given that ultimately the decision to lockdown rested at least capacity —— in part on what the impact on the nhs would likely be if that decision were not taken, we need to know to what extent the actuality of the impact was debated? was it taken as it said that there

would be a collapse and therefore you had to act? was there a detailed debate about the reality of the nhs, and whether or not in fact an alternative position could be taken, which wouldn't inevitably lead to the collapse of the nhs? i which wouldn't inevitably lead to the collapse of the nhs?- the collapse of the nhs? i can't specifically _ the collapse of the nhs? i can't specifically recall. _ the collapse of the nhs? i can't specifically recall. you - the collapse of the nhs? i can't specifically recall. you are - specifically recall. you are absolutely right, there was a lot of talk about icu and monitoring of icus, what was happening, and then you had the forecast from the scientific advisers with degrees of infection and hospitalisation and as far as i can remember, or i might confuse it with the later period, you could put the curves, here is the line of nhs capacity, here is the line of nhs capacity, here is the admissions.— the line of nhs capacity, here is the admissions. there were curves then. the admissions. there were curves then- there _ the admissions. there were curves then. there were _ the admissions. there were curves then. there were graphs _ the admissions. there were curves then. there were graphs about - then. there were graphs about improving _ then. there were graphs about improving capacity _ then. there were graphs about improving capacity through - improving capacity through nightingale orflexing improving capacity through nightingale or flexing stuff capacity which i think we did. i don't remember there being enormous

challenges of those assumptions that we were presented. i'll be honest, though, i can't precisely recall. but i think it was just, i though, i can't precisely recall. but i think it wasjust, i think it was largely taken if they were saying we are going to be overwhelmed in a matter of days or weeks if this carries on, this projected curve, there wasn't an enormous amount of disagreement about that. regardless we should do everything we can to increase capacity and i think we did, investing in nightingales in particular and changing staffing ratios with the other thing that helped. but i don't precisely as i recall the data but you are right that that is what is driving everything. it was not a total suppression. and i think this is where this issue of herd immunity came out. ., where this issue of herd immunity came out. . ., , , where this issue of herd immunity came out. . . , , ., came out. can we address head immunity _ came out. can we address head immunity and — came out. can we address head immunity and other _ came out. can we address head immunity and other strategic i came out. can we address head - immunity and other strategic issues separately? == immunity and other strategic issues searatel ? , separately? -- herd immunity separately? — separately? -- herd immunity separately? just _ separately? -- herd immunity separately? just on _ separately? -- herd immunity separately? just on the - separately? -- herd immunity separately? just on the nhs, | separately? -- herd immunity. separately? just on the nhs, in hindsight, prime minister, and you

have looked back at the documentation from the weekend of course and the monday and the cobra meeting at 5p on the monday and the cabinet meeting which took place after the public announcement on the tuesday, are you surprised by a relative absence of hard data as to the direct impact on the nhs? find the direct impact on the nhs? and the direct impact on the nhs? and the amount — the direct impact on the nhs? and the amount of— the direct impact on the nhs? and the amount of debate which was on what would happen to the nhs if by contrast of taking the further ultimate step on the monday, the government had simply waited to see whether or not the measures imposed in good faith in the previous week should be given more time to work? one of my more general reflections on this whole thing but particularly this period as well is about data, and access to good data. i think it's very clear that early on, there just wasn't the quality and timeliness of the data in all areas that you would have liked in order

to make decisions, i think that's clear. that improved over time. the good news is i'd like to believe if this happened again, we now know the data that we need and are able to get it in terms of monitoring the progression of the virus or what is happening in the economy, testing, all these things, including the nhs. do i think at this moment in time the data was great? i don't think so, i think it would be much improved today about our ability to work out what is happening in various hospitals. the general election, i agree, various hospitals. the general election, iagree, data various hospitals. the general election, i agree, data was not as good as it could have been at the beginning, i think that would be a big lesson for me. to your broader point about scrutiny on this, this is all happening very quickly, as new devices coming in from the people at sage, it was essentially

acted on —— as new advice is coming in from the people at sage it was acted on, on the 12th, 16th, 18th, 20th, 23rd. you refer to days and i think about it as dates in my head so if you could translate your monday and sunday into aches in my headit monday and sunday into aches in my head it would help me. the 16th is when the advice changed about the timing of implementation, government announced same day, 18th, again, conversation about... we announced same day, 18th, again, conversation about. . ._ announced same day, 18th, again, conversation about... we are going to be looking _ conversation about... we are going to be looking after _ conversation about... we are going to be looking after the _ conversation about... we are going to be looking after the break - conversation about... we are going to be looking after the break that i to be looking after the break that in a bit more detail. i didn't suggest to you that the data was not as it could have been at the beginning, to which you lent your assent by saying, i agree. there was obviously data before you and your colleagues from the nhs sit reps which were daily, there was data in relation to the number of beds, icu beds, there was data in relation to the infection fatality rates,

hospitalisation rates and so on. the broad position was plain as a pike stuff. you knew what the position was in the nhs, and you knew what the position was in terms of hospitalisation and fatality rates. my hospitalisation and fatality rates. my question to you is, are you surprised at the relative absence of debate in those final ultimate decision—making meetings as to what really would happen to the nhs if you decided not to impose a mandatory stay at home order? i mean, as i remember it, ithink, you have to remember there were all these scenes, what people talked about a lot was a long body. it was in italy, that region of italy, —— lombardi. there were scenes of hospitals being overwhelmed, and that was in the consciousness, what happened there, needing to avoid

that happening in the uk. i think that happening in the uk. i think that was the emotion backdrop to these conversations. you are absolutely right, the nhs had all of the data, and it was based on scientific modelling of what was going to happen to hospital admissions, and the nhs saying if you have admissions up here and capacity down here, there is a poor outcome for everybody. i don't remember the degree of scrutiny over those assumptions. i know you guys are being very conservative, you can treat five times as many people as you can think, i don't remember those kind of conversations, they might have happened, i would not have had any particular ability to challenge them i don't think. if the chief medical officer of the nhs are saying this is the amount of staff we have got and this is how many are going to be off sick themselves and this is the mae shi —— maximum ratio of icu nurses to a bed even if we flex it, it's probably hard for me

to say, you're wrong. i could probably say, they have done this over here or this over there but this is not my lane, so to speak. this was of course one of the most momentous decisions in the history of this nation. a great deal of water has passed under the bridge. the decision taken at that 5p a meeting. the decision taken at that 5p a meetinu. ~ , ., the decision taken at that 5p a meetinu. ~ ., meeting. when you say that i meeting. _ meeting. when you say that i meeting, what _ meeting. when you say that i meeting, what date? - meeting. when you say that i j meeting, what date? monday meeting. when you say that i - meeting, what date? monday 23rd of march, the decision _ meeting, what date? monday 23rd of march, the decision to _ meeting, what date? monday 23rd of march, the decision to impose - meeting, what date? monday 23rd of march, the decision to impose a - march, the decision to impose a mandatory stay at home order followed by the prime minister announcing it and the cabinet meeting the following day, it all revolves around that decision. my suggestion to you is, that debate just didn't take place or if it did, it didn't take place to the degree to which it should. i it didn't take place to the degree to which it should.— to which it should. i can't precisely _ to which it should. i can't precisely recall— to which it should. i can't precisely recall that - to which it should. i can't - precisely recall that particular meeting. but as i said the track record of all those meetings, 16th, 18th, 19th, 20th and 23rd was the government following scientific advice that was put in front of it

about the right npis to implement at what time. �* ., , about the right npis to implement at what time. 1, , ., about the right npis to implement at what time._ based - about the right npis to implement at what time._ based on - what time. based on? based on protecting _ what time. based on? based on protecting the _ what time. based on? based on protecting the nhs as you - what time. based on? based on protecting the nhs as you said. | protecting the nhs as you said. certainly, we will break until five past12~ — past 12. you are watching past 12. — you are watching live coverage of the covid inquiry in london where the covid inquiry in london where the prime minister rishi sunak has concluded the first part of his evidence to the inquiry. there is going to be a short break but he will return. he is due to give evidence until about 5pm today. rishi sunak was chancellor during the pandemic and has been questioned about the decisions he made at the time. so some highlights of what has been discussed so far. a key focus of the lead counsel's questions are looked at the prime minister's views at the time about the tensions between public health concerns and the impact of lockdowns on people, and also how he put forward his position to the prime minister and to the cabinet. there were also

questions about how decisions were made in downing street as well as the culture there. at the prime minister began by apologising to people who had lost loved ones, or had been affected by actions taken during the pandemic. here's what he had to say. i during the pandemic. here's what he had to sa . , ., ., during the pandemic. here's what he hadto sa. , ., ., , ., had to say. i 'ust wanted to start b sa in: had to say. ijust wanted to start by saying how — had to say. ijust wanted to start by saying how deeply _ had to say. ijust wanted to start by saying how deeply sorry - had to say. ijust wanted to start by saying how deeply sorry i - had to say. ijust wanted to start by saying how deeply sorry i am | had to say. ijust wanted to start l by saying how deeply sorry i am to all of those who lost loved ones, family members, through the pandemic, and also all those who suffered in the various different ways throughout the pandemic and as a result of the actions that were taken. i've thought a lot about this over the past couple of years. it is important that we learn the lessons so we can be better prepared in the future, and it's in that spirit and with enormous respect for all of those who were affected, that i am here today and i look forward to giving evidence in the spirit of constructive candle to help the inquiry with its deliberations. —— inquiry with its deliberations. —— in the spirit of conductive candour.

let's go live to our correspondence following the inquiry. mr sunak started with an apology, what did you make of that?— started with an apology, what did you make of that? yeah, i mean, it has been the _ you make of that? yeah, i mean, it has been the format _ you make of that? yeah, i mean, it has been the format for _ you make of that? yeah, i mean, it has been the format for most - you make of that? yeah, i mean, it has been the format for most of. you make of that? yeah, i mean, it| has been the format for most of the cabinet ministers, senior politicians at the time, to make that apology. it quite clearly sets the tone, doesn't it? as you can see, there are protesters outside here, there are a number of people from bereaved families who have gone into the inquiry room to watch proceedings in person. so i think it feels very important for the politicians to make the apology and it sets the tone for the evidence coming up but quite honestly, i suppose it represents some respect from the politicians because they see what is at stake in terms of the evidence and they see in terms of these bereaved families and the wider public watching these inquiries how important all that is. though not surprised at all. interesting his wording of it all,

apologies as a result of the actions that were taken. not necessarily implying his own personal responsibility but the wider context of the government which he has now inherited as the prime minister. and, early, another key aspect was questioning from the league counsel hugo keith about the prime minister's whatsapp messages, tell is a bit about that exchange. you will remember _ is a bit about that exchange. ym. will remember right at the start of this part of the inquiry, in fact, going back months before that, there was a lot of toing and froing about what private whatsapp messages would be made available. there were a number of whatsapp messages from rishi sunak that were not made available, he explained again today that he had used multiple phones and you didn't have access to any of those messages and it was simply a technicality, certainly wanting to shed any issue of there being any kind of cover—up. i think we can hear a clip from that part of the

inquiry now. hear a clip from that part of the inquiry nova— hear a clip from that part of the inuui now. ., , ., i. inquiry now. your phone, you said, doesnt inquiry now. your phone, you said, doesn't retain _ inquiry now. your phone, you said, doesn't retain an _ inquiry now. your phone, you said, doesn't retain an order— inquiry now. your phone, you said, doesn't retain an order you - inquiry now. your phone, you said, doesn't retain an order you access| doesn't retain an order you access text messages at all relating to the period of the crisis. and in addition, you said although on occasion use whatsapp to communicate around meetings and logistics and so on, you generally were only party to whatsapp groups that were set up to deal with individual circumstances such as arrangements for calls, meetings and so on and so forth. as a broadly correct?— a broadly correct? yes, that is a broadly correct _ a broadly correct? yes, that is a broadly correct to _ a broadly correct? yes, that is a broadly correct to stop - a broadly correct? yes, that is a broadly correct to stop what - a broadly correct? yes, that is a broadly correct to stop what you don't now have access to any of the whatsapp that you sent during the crisis? no, idon't, i have whatsapp that you sent during the crisis? no, i don't, i have changed my phone multiple times over the past few years and as that has happened, the messages have not come across. as you said, i'm not a prolific use of whatsapp in the first instance, primarily to munication with my private office

and anything of significance through those communications would have been recorded officially by my civil servants as one would expect. evidence has been given to the inquiry to the effect that mr johnson announced the institution of this inquiry in may 2021, and around that time, officials discussed the need for ministers and others to retain whatsapps, it was a matter of debate in whatsapp communications between officials themselves. around that time, april and may 2021, did nobody say to you, chancellor, it is important that you do retain your whatsapps all, we need to put in place measures for them to be backed up place measures for them to be backed up in case they become relevant to an inquiry?— an inquiry? no, i don't recall, either those _ an inquiry? no, i don't recall, either those conversations - an inquiry? no, i don't recall, l either those conversations that an inquiry? no, i don't recall, - either those conversations that you referred to between officials but you might have been referring to officials in number 10 rather than the treasury. officials in number10 rather than the treasury-_ officials in number 10 rather than the treasury. yes. and i don't

recall anyone _ the treasury. yes. and i don't recall anyone in _ the treasury. yes. and i don't recall anyone in my _ the treasury. yes. and i don't recall anyone in my office - the treasury. yes. and i don't recall anyone in my office making that recommendation or observation to me at the time. and the prime minister talked about official records of conversations. but the lead counsel also had questions about the paper trail of all these conversations and how they were recorded and whether the inquiry can have access to them. yes, and the answer from inquiry can have access to them. yes, and the answerfrom rishi sunak to all of that was, well, this was a situation, i was chancellor, boris johnson was the prime minister and we lived in the same official residence. number10 we lived in the same official residence. number 10 and we lived in the same official residence. number10 and number11 downing street next door. he said when they were having a chat in the garden at the weekend, it would be very private, but you couldn't help but talk about the big issue of the time, the covid inquiry. we have heard this time and time again about private messages and e—mail and whatsapp and the tone

sometimes has been comfortable because they were never meant for